[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The evil build methods of thy libev

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 09:45:58PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Maximilian Gaß:
> > The second option I came up with was creating a libev-source package from the
> > existing libev package and build packages including libev against this one.
> > Bugs in libev would then only require a rebuild of the dependent packages
> > instead of source package fixing. I think this solution is suboptimal but less
> > invasive.
> This is comparable to C++ templates, so it's not *that* bad, it's just
> rather unusual, and somewhat disappointing for something which is
> quite likely to transparently pick up kernel API improvements (which
> it has done with epoll, if the library is old enough).

I have gained some more insight into the libev internals.  According to
a colleague of the library's developer, libev can be heavily customized
when embedded, producing entirely different kinds of libraries.

Due do this news and the massive inconvience of patching everything, I
am currently favoring the libev-source solution.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: